Panchbahadur Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

The instant criminal appeal under section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. (now under Section 415(2)of BNSS) has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 10-03-2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/FTCIst Sultanpur in S.T. No. 484/2010, Case Crime no. 558 of 2010, (State vs Panchbahadur Shukla), u/s-498-A, 306 IPC, Police Station-Gosainganj, Sultanpur, whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under section 498-A IPC, one years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.5,000/-fine. In default of payment of fine additional simple imprisonment of 7 days. Under section 306 IPC, 5 year rigorous imprisonment and Rs.5,000/- fine. In default of payment of fine 7 days additional simple imprisonment and both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the FIR was lodged on 12/7/2010 at 12:45 hours on the basis of a written report filed by the informant Nand Kishore Mishra, wherein no date or time of incident is shown. It is stated that the incident occurred between 5/7/2010 to 8/7/2010. Thus, there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, according to the prosecution version, on 5/7/2010, in the morning, the daughter of the

¶16

CRLA No. 747 of 2026

¶17

2

¶18

informant was brutally assaulted by the named accused persons, who are the husband, brother-in-law, sister-in-law of the deceased and one Jubaira, a teacher. She was hospitalized in serious condition. The daughter of the deceased, Abha Shukla, informed the informant about the incident. The informant and his family members visited the hospital where the victim was receiving treatment on 7/7/2010. She was referred to Allahabad and hospitalized in Ganga Nursing Home. From there, she was referred to Nazrath Hospital, where she died on 8/7/2010 at 9:30 p.m. during treatment. The husband of the deceased had an illicit relationship with a teacher, Jubaira. Prior to the incident of the case, a case was registered against the appellant under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 13 of the Domestic Violence Act. The named accused persons had administered the poison to the deceased, which resulted in her death.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant next submitted that out of five named persons, only the husband of the deceased was charge-sheeted and subsequently convicted and sentenced by the learned trial court. The deceased was hospitalized for three days, but her dying declaration was not recorded by any competent authority.

¶20

He also submitted that in the injury report of the victim, recorded on the date of the incident, no external injury was found on her person. Some injuries are shown in the external examination of the deceased in her postmortem report, but these injury marks appear to have occurred due to post-mortem staining. P.W.6 Rishi Sahai, who conducted the post-mortem examination of the deceased, has stated in his cross-examination that no external injury was found on the person of the deceased at the time of death, i.e. 8/7/2010 at 9:30 PM. As per hospital record, there was no mark of resistance on the person of the deceased, which is natural in case of forceful poisoning.

¶21

Learned counsel for the appellant lastly submitted that appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty of bail. The appellant has already undergone jail custody for about 11 months against 5 year sentence awarded to him. Aabha Shukla, alias Niharika Shukla, who is the daughter of the deceased has made no allegation against her father, the appellant. In her evidence before the court, she stated that her father had

¶22

CRLA No. 747 of 2026

¶23

3

¶24

brought fruit juice for her and her mother, but her mother had not consumed the same. She came to home after taking juice from the market and started vomiting between 4:30 PM and 5:00 PM, she telephoned her father to tell him that her mother was sick. There is no specific allegation against the appellant that he abetted the victim to commit suicide.

¶25

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and submitted that the deceased appears to have committed suicide due to cruelty and torture by her husband. This fact has also been introduced in the evidence of complainant that the appellant was involved in relationship with another woman, namely Jubera.

¶26

Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the evidence, the nature of the allegations, and the quantum of sentence awarded to the appellant, is five years imprisonment against which the appellant has served 11 months in jail custody as well as the appellant was on bail during trial and the hearing and disposal of the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶27

Let the appellant, namely, Panchbahadur Shukla, be released on bail in the aforesaid Sessions Trial number during the pendency of appeal on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶28

On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bonds, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on record.

¶29

The appellant has undertaken not to indulge into any anti-social activity particularly against the informant and in the event of any such incident it shall be open to the complainant to make an application for cancellation of bail.

¶30

As regards fine, half of the amount of fine will be deposited by the appellant within a month of his release from jail pursuant to present bail order, the remaining half of the fine shall be stayed during pendency the appeal.

¶31

Order on the memo of appeal.

¶32

CRLA No. 747 of 2026

¶33

4

¶34